Free Will!!

Mathew Naismith

We must remember, non-material evidence, like faith or intuition, is not going to be accepted as evidence of existence by a material consciousness. I often produce material evidence to consciousnesses of materialism, but I have more faith in non-material evidence that is from a consciousness of infinite consciousness, not finite consciousness like material consciousness. However, in a material reality, non-material evidence can become distorted, like our faith or intuition can become overly influenced by materialism.

I have recently been asked to supply evidence or give an example of free will. Giving material evidence to free will is easy. Giving non-material evidence of free will is not easy, not if you want a material mind to comprehend this as evidence.  I did find an interesting article on this which I passed on to the person who asked for evidence of free will.

"Over the years I have revisited this paradox many times. In my mid-twenties I wrote a magazine article entitled “And the Opposite is Also True.”   There I argued that it was not a question of whether free will or determinism was correct. I postulated that they were like two sides of a coin; two very different perspectives of the same reality. From one perspective determinism is true; from the other free will is true. But as to what these two complementary perspectives might be, I wasn’t clear.

Then last year, in one of those moments of insight, it all fell into place. I realized that the two fundamentally different perspectives stemmed from two fundamentally different states of consciousness."

Two fundamentally different states of consciousness, not one. One consciousness driven by ego (motion), the other by egoless (motionless) but all the same, still of consciousness. You cannot define that there is no free will by deriving at this fact while only considering one type of consciousness, a consciousness of motion (soul) as opposed to motionless, a consciousness in the absence of a soul to start with.  

"They find that what we take to be a sense of an omnipresent “I” is simply consciousness itself. There is no separate experiencer; there is simply a quality of being, a sense of presence, an awareness that is always there whatever our experience. They conclude that what we experience to be an independent self is a construct in the mind—very real in its appearance but of no intrinsic substance. It, like the choices it appears to make, is a consequence of processes in the brain. It has no free will of its own."

There is no separate experiencer which gives us the perception there is no free will, however, when many consciousnesses become one, which creates a state of motionlessness, free will is evident. You probably need to experience this to know this. This is like giving birth, how many blokes exactly know what it is like giving birth? When you have not yourself experienced a motionless state, you will of course never know or even want to know that this state is of free will.

"Free will and determinism are no longer paradoxical in the sense of being mutually exclusive. Both are correct, depending upon the consciousness from which they are considered. The paradox only appears when we consider both sides from the same state of consciousness, i.e, the everyday waking state."

"I remember hearing a statement Maharishi Mahesh Yogi said something like: ” We can choose whatever we like, eg plant an orange seed or an apple seed, but once the choice is made, the result is already determined by that choice”. This to me resolved the paradox and made both sides compatible as you suggested."

Source: https://www.scienceandnonduality.com/the-paradox-of-free-will/

Try to understand free will though; your environment often determines your actions. In saying this, you are often a reflection of your environment, an environment of your choice or a choice of another within your environment!!   

Yes, I Am Still Present

Written by Mathew Naismith

I try not to perceive the environment as a whole simply through my own perspectives and perceptions, I like to also explore the environment through different perspectives and perceptions. This brings me to Soul Theory, a book written by a physicist interested in yogi teachings on the soul and how the soul doesn't have free will.   

"In relation to God, if God was to be proven to exist without a doubt, God to me still wouldn't exist even when it does. Why? Because when you are one with this God, this yogic consciousness, what then makes a God?

However, seen as many souls are not one with God, this yogic consciousness, there will always be a God, a higher consciousness than our own as there will always be a so-called lower consciousness in existence. Always has been and always will.

In relation to free will. Free will within an unlimited infinite consciousness exists, to freely experience any part of consciousness, even when to experience parts of this consciousness takes one to become unaware of consciousness as a whole, of yogic consciousness.

There are infinite possibilities because yogic, God's consciousness, is not limited to, negatives and positives, free will and non-free will, bad and good, right and wrong. However, when not of God's consciousness, yogic consciousness, we don't have free will because each reality determines our will, but, at any time we can change this reality at will. This is the infinite being of yogic consciousness.

As there is a God but there isn't, there is also free will but there isn't. To me, to say there is no God is to say there is no yogic consciousness when there is, to me anyway.

Each reality literally has infinite possibilities of non-free will but our souls can experience any possibility of any reality at any time. Is my own soul is of a determined outcome to do this? It would seem so at first but once you realise everything is of one consciousness, what I experience, all experience. It is like astral travelling, we all astral travel, it's just our minds can't remember doing this because our human minds are not conditioned to astral travelling. Just because our human minds are unable to see that we have free will, doesn't make it so but the process of thinking this makes us believe we have no free will. We have free will but we don't at the same time.

There isn’t an existence of free will but a consciousness of free will, yogic consciousness if you like. You use a soul to experience any soul life experience, a soul that has no predestined outcome, or, experience any experience that another soul is having.
All existence is predestined, however, there are infinite predestined experiences which can seem like we have free will in relation to existence.

As for yogic consciousness, it exists but it doesn’t!! In certain states, existence has no bearing nor existence but in other states it does. I know for a fact I am not just living for myself as an individual, many other souls are also living my life. One mind, many souls.

Are you correct that a consciousness of existence has no real free will? Yes, but free will exists outside of existence. Can I give an example of this while of existence? No…….

One more thing, can yogic consciousness create something like the universe, consciousness and souls? In my mind yes. I think for souls that only know of existence, calling this consciousness a God is feasible and plausible.
It is good you are still getting interest here in your work Subhendu."

"What is consciousness of freewill?"

Yogic or God's consciousness. Yogic consciousness can be of the accumulation of all consciousnesses, not just a perception of a singular souls consciousness. In other words, a yogic conscious mind can be the accumulation of numerous souls consciousness and even of all souls consciousness. A person can be living for a number of likened souls consciousnesses, numerous consciousnesses working in unison and in peace in one mind and body. Are people with multiple personalities of dissimilar personalities/consciousness experiencing different souls experiencing one mind and body?  Possession is a different thing, where one soul takes over the mind and body of a person/soul.

Imagine a yogi being able to create environments, universes, instead of being influenced by environments. Before we are born, we are influenced by the environment, now imagine influencing environments instead of being influenced by environments!! Can you see where free will lays?          

"Consciousness cannot exist without a noun, which is a soul."

The soul is motion therefore ego, what then represents an egoless consciousness that is not of motion? Just because our egos are unable to comprehend a motionless egoless consciousness, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Motionless egoless consciousness is not limited to nouns Subhendu, only the ego is.

"Note that freewill is related to actions."
No, freewill is related to the egoless consciousness therefore motion. The absence of free will is wholly of motion therefore ego.

Actually, the existence of freewill or not is highly irrelevant to the egoless self, but of course to the ego self it's everything!! It is like arguing what is truly right and wrong, truth and lies, negative and positive, black and white, it has no relevance to a true yogi/God consciousness Subhendu.

https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

Seeing It As It Is

Written by Mathew Naismith

Seeing it as it is, not how I would desire to see it, gets me into a lot of trouble with other people. It is like with love, just because I don't desire to feel the affects of love, in other words lust after what the feelings of love gives to the ego, I am not of love. I simply don't desire to feel the affects of love but allow these feelings to naturally exist, without effort, within certain conscious states. It is natural that within certain conscious states, the ego will experience feelings of love, giving the ego a false ideology that these states are simply of love.

I also don't desire being positive over and above being negative, in all honesty, I simply allow myself to be neutral as much as possible. I have learnt so much from the so-called negatives, way more than from the positives. In all honesty, my ego has learnt from these experiences instead of suffering from these experiences. To me, to suffer from an experience is to counteract a negative experience with a positive experience. This is the same in counteracting hate with love, most often to the same degree or to the same excess. Within this, one to me is still suffering from the collective consciousness experience rather than learning from the collective conscious experience.

How shocking it was practicing in cannibalism or going to see people fight to the death in a Roman arena, but it is alright to deliberately make people ill so you can live/feed off of them. I recently read an article in how doctors who dared find cancer enzymes in vaccines systematically died/murdered. And how many people are fighting for there very existence, not just in wars but materialistically? The whole planet has become an arena that was deliberately created to serve the few materialistically. In all honesty, are we learning from what human consciousness has experienced or are we still suffering from these experiences?

I will always be hated or despised for my honesty; I would rather this than the alternative of course. Simply, self-dishonesty isn't an alternative for people like me, we must see it how it is, not how our egos would desire to see it. As I am not into separation as in black and white people instead of just people, I am not into negatives and positives. Don't' be conned by the controlling ego that desires to separate through perceptions of black and white, negative and positive perceptions, negative and positives are simply perceptions created by the ego. You really don't need to be positive, just not negative, within this you will be able to see everything for what it really is, not how the ego desires to only see it, in black and white, negatives and positives!!

In the Presence of Wisdom

Wisdom I know is social. She seeks

her fellows. But Beauty is jealous,

and illy bears the presence of a rival.

~Thomas Jefferson~

Written by Mathew Naismith

As it is said from a Jewish view point, "Wisdom is the perfection of knowledge of the righteous as a gift from God showing itself in action. In direct relation to God, Wisdom is with God from all eternity." Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Wisdom

So is this saying that in the absence of the perception of God, wisdom is also absent? The Jewish and Christian perspective on this would be to say yes, in the absence of God, wisdom is also absent!!

As it is said intellectually, wisdom is of an accumulated knowledge, erudition or enlightenment. Wisdom is also said to be of the trait of utilizing knowledge and experience with common sense and insight. Also, an ability to apply knowledge, experience, understanding or common sense and insight.

The perception of wisdom comes in many forms, as the perception of God or whatever you want to call this wise and aware consciousness. Wisdom to me is simply in the absence of a controlling ego. Within this absence of the controlling ego, wisdom is present. Within the presence of a controlling ego, wisdom is absent. Can we also relate this to, in the absence of a controlling ego, God is present. In the presence of a controlling ego, God is absent in man's consciousness. To me, the perception of God relates to the presence of wisdom no matter how wisdom is exemplified or presented. Of course the ego in control will of course try to separate one from the other, if you are not of God, you are not of wisdom. I instead look at it this way, if you are in the presence of the controlling ego with all it's desires and lusts for control, material wealth, power and even the desires of  ethereal pleasures of love in any form, the perception of  wisdom therefore God is also absent. Love expressed through wisdom isn't of lust but of a purer expression of love in the absence of a controlling ego. 

A consciousness of God to me simply exemplifies wisdom and awareness no matter how you want to exemplify or call this kind of consciousness. Even in the absence of the perception of God as such, wisdom can still be present as long as the controlling ego is absent. Religious people will call this kind of consciousness God, other people will call it something else but it is still of the same consciousness no matter how we exemplify this consciousness. God simply means a consciousness of the absence of a controlling ego, thus allowing wisdom to not just be present eternally but flourish. Yes, even in a reality such as ours, wisdom can flourish but only in the absence of a controlling ego. The ego is of course still present but the ego is no longer in control where wisdom is allowed to flourish. However, being of man's reality, wisdom in this case is never meant to be eternally present, it is something man's consciousness has to always work at. 

Love, God, Wisdom, Fairies, Etc

Written by Mathew Niasmith

What is the first thing the ego does here? Dissimilarly separates one consciousness from the other in relation to the ego's perception. All the above and more is of the same consciousness, it is just the ego only desires to see what the consciousness physically relates to rather than what the form actually represents consciously. In other words, instead of looking at the physical aspect of consciousness, look at the non-physical aspect of consciousness. How many people worship a physical idol while forgetting what the idle actually represents consciously? For example, how many atrocities have been acted out in the name of Jesus or the cross of Jesus?

Now, how many people today are dissimilarly separating love from wisdom and even love from God? As I wrote recently when I didn't relate love and wisdom, "Good point but with wisdom comes love ever so naturally as if by magic. Yes, multinationals have a very strong and passionate love of money and power but in the absence of wisdom, all this love creates is chaos and destruction. We have love but we don't have the wisdom in implementing this love constructively and peacefully. This is like we don't have the wisdom to use technology. Yes, we are intelligent but do we have the wisdom to know how to use this intelligence, like with love?

Love has always been present but the wisdom in how to use love, as of intelligence, hasn't."

Is love the key? Without wisdom of balance, meaning, wisdom naturally creates a balance as of love, love can become exceptionally destructive and chaotic. The key isn't love but wisdom of balance, the ability to constructively use love, not abusively use love. This is often in the absence of the ego or at least consciously taking away the control of the ego over our own consciousness. Mentioning a constructive peaceful love in the absence of wisdom of balance is pure ego, nothing more, which so often occurs these days. Take away the control of the ego, all you have left is pure wisdom that naturally creates, love, peace, balance and so much more.........